"Anders Peter Johnsen" <anderspj@REMOVE_THISwebspeed.dk> wrote in message
news:43a42e5c$0$46975$edfadb0f@dread15.news.tele.dk...
> Jens G wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 15:32:35 +0100, Anders Peter Johnsen
>> <anderspj@REMOVE_THISwebspeed.dk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
http://nyhederne.tv2.dk/article.php?id=3367631&forside
>>>
>>>Nu mener Abu Laban guddødme at "profeten" Muhammed ligefrem skal FEJRES
>>>på højere danske læreanstalter!
>>
>>
>> Jeg ved ikke hvad der forventes at komme ud af sådan en
>> forsoningsfest.
>>
>> Meningen er jo at der skal fortælles om profeten, samt debatteres. Men
>> hvad bliver reaktionen hvis nogen af deltagerne tager ytringsfriheden
>> alvorligt, og begynder at tale om et forhold til en meget ung pige,
>> eller for den sags skyld de sataniske vers? Mon ikke tingene så bliver
>> meget værre?
>
> Samme tanke har strejfet mig: Hvis nu Niebuhr-instituttet kunne tænke sig
> at sige "Tak for sidst" ved at fremføre noget RIGTIG kritisk Muhammed- og
> Islamforskning, ville der næppe være udsigt til den store forkromede
> "forsoning".
Man behøver nu ikke være forsker, eller specielt kritisk forsker, for at
bidrage med informationer om Profetens liv, som ville sætte landet på den
anden ende. Mht Profeten, er der ikke noget særligt at "forske" sig frem
til, man har kun de samme to-tre historiske beretninger om ham, og så de
tusinder af haditter, som anses som mere hellige end fx Det NY Testamente, -
fordi NT kun er andenhåndsberetninger siger muslimer, mens de hævder at
haditterne er garanteret førstehånds, - dvs, når man har erklæret
beretterkæden for "autentisk", så er man på 100% sikker grund. Og her er jo
utrolige beretninger om mord på og lemlæstelser af politiske fjender, og
overtro så det fløjter. Nu er der også mange muslimer som skammer sig over
mange ting i biografien over Profeten og som mener at mange haditter burde
smides ud, - problemet er bare, som andre muslimer skriver, at så falder
hele lovgrundlaget fra hinanden. Mange konvertitter går især efter sigende
op i de mange regler som stammer fra Profetens mund, - hvilken fod sætter
man først ind på et toilet, og hvilket først ud, hvor mange stykker xxx
tørrer man sig i røven med (altid et ulige antal tre eller fem iflg
Profeten, - som man også kan læse på Internettets fatwaer fra lærde mænd).
Man burde gøre grin med hele denne persondyrkelse, det ville gavne utroligt
hvis hele den muslimske verden kunne få sig en god latter og Profetens mange
idiotier, de kunne jo holde lige meget af ham alligevel, - men man tør ikke
tage udfordringen op.
Niebuhr'erne forsker i hvordan man tolker kilderne, hvilke man lægger mest
vægt på osv. Historisk ved man intet om Muhammed, han blev ikke omtalt før
over 70 år efter sin død, ingen segl med hans navn og intet på mønterne, så
formodentlig er de fleste af historierne om manden rent opspind, men det er
heller ikke så vigtigt, hvad der tæller er *hvad* man har opfundet om ham,
og været glade for at videregive som hans gøren og laden, og hvad man i dag
bruger disse historier til.
Hvis man vil se lidt om hvad Profeten mente om mange forskellige emner, så
kan man checke
http://www.prophetofdoom.net/
Hvor man også kan downloade bogen Prophet of Doom, - jeg har selv checket
mange af citaterne fra Koranen og haditterne, og de har været helt i orden.
Forfatteren skriver her sin mening om Profeten:
To write Prophet of Doom, I analyzed the Sira, the Ta'rikh, or History of
al-Tabari, and the topical Hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim. Using
Islam's most holy books I was able to reorder the Qur'an chronologically and
set it into the context of Muhammad's life. The result is bone chilling. The
depiction of the prophet by the most revered Muslim sources reveals behavior
that is immoral, criminal, and violent. The five oldest and most trusted
Islamic sources don't portray Muhammad as a great and godly man. They
confirm that he was a thief, liar, assassin, mass murderer, terrorist,
warmonger, and an unrestrained sexual pervert engaged in pedophilia, incest,
and rape. He authorized deception, assassinations, torture, slavery, and
genocide. He was a pirate, not a prophet. According to the Hadith and the
Qur'an, Muhammad and his henchmen plundered their way to power and
prosperity. And by putting the Qur'an in chronological order and correlating
it with the context of Muhammad's life, we find that Allah mirrored his
prophet's character. Muhammad's god condoned immoral and criminal behavior.
Allah boasts about being a terrorist. He claims to have deceived men, to
have stolen their property, to have enslaved women and children, to having
committed acts of murder, genocide, and sadistic tortures.
Jeg har selv bestilt en oversættelse af den allerførste biografi om
Profeten, men den er ikke til at få fat på, kun antikvarisk.
Her er lidt om en nutidig egypter, som mener man skal revidere sin tolkning
af kilderne radikalt:
Therefore, the ordinary Muslim cannot understand the Quran without a Mufasir
(an interpreter) and a Mufti. Al-Qimni believed that this was a key reason
for the monopolisation by a group of scholars who claimed that their
interpretation was the only right one. Any other interpretation was
considered Kufr (unbelief). Through this interview al-Qimni expressed his
views as follows:
1- Quran needs to be re-arranged and looked upon more carefully.
2- There is no priesthood in Islam.
3- The law of apostasy does not exist in the Quran.
4- Muslim scholars do not want to recognize woman's rights and label her as
deficient in religion and intellect.
5- The concept of Jihad is a communal and racist idea and is rejected by the
modern time.
6- What the early Muslim Mujahdeen had done in those countries they had
invaded need to be apologized for today.
Al-Qimni controversially argued that the occupation of Arabs in Egypt should
be counted as the longest foreign occupation in the world (5). The
backwardness of Egypt came, he believed, from the acceptance of this Arabic
occupation and the adoption of the Arabic culture. This view undoubtedly
stirred discontent amongst the rligious traditionalists in Egypt. Referring
to a speech delivered by al-Qimni on the International Book Exhibition in
Cairo on Jan 14, 2004, The Muslim Brothers newspaper (al-Akhwan al-Muslmoon)
argued that the speech was meant to demolish all the pillars of Islam (6).
The newspaper stated further that al-Qimni had said the first Muslim
invaders had stolen all the treasures of Egypt and therefore Egypt should
not be called an Arab and Muslim country any more. Islam should not be the
official religion of Egypt and the Sharia laws should not be considered the
main basis for the Egyptian constitution. In an article called 'Doubtful
Books,' in al-Watan newspaper, Abd Allah al-Samti said 'writers like Khalil
Abd al-Karim, Sa'id al-Ashmawi, Sayyid al-Qimni, al-Sadig Nihum, and Nawal
al-Sa'adawi want people to believe that the Quran is not revealed but the
word of Muhammad'. For these writers Muhammad was just a great man and not
the seal of the prophets.